18:00:09 #startmeeting 18:00:09 Meeting started Wed Dec 7 18:00:09 2011 UTC. The chair is Brooke. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 18:00:16 #topic Introductions 18:00:29 Welcome, welcome, please introduce yourself using #info 18:00:32 #info wizzyrea - Liz Rea - NEKLS 18:00:50 #info jcamins - Jared Camins-Esakov, C & P Bibliography Services, LLC 18:00:51 #info Thomas Dukleth, Agogme, New York City 18:00:53 #info Jane Wagner, LibLime/PTFS 18:00:59 #info Katrin Fischer, BSZ, Germany 18:01:17 #info mirko tietgen, humboldt-universität zu berlin, germany 18:01:31 #info Irma Birchall, CALYX 18:01:36 #info mason.james, nz 18:01:39 #info Chris Nighswonger, FBC 18:01:40 #info David Nind, Wellington, New Zealand 18:02:00 #info Indranil Das Gupta, Kolkata, India 18:02:11 #info MJ Ray, software.coop, Norfolk, England 18:02:24 joann ransom hlt NZ 18:02:35 #info Dobrica Pavlinusic, FFZG, Zagreb, Croatia 18:02:41 #info Marijana Glavica, Croatia 18:02:42 * slef hands jransom an #info 18:03:25 (can't find hash key yet on my transgformer keyboard - so yeah, thanks0 18:03:26 #info Thatcher Rea, ByWater Solutions, USA 18:03:49 joannR: copy-paste one? 18:03:59 (what's a transgformer?) 18:04:15 Haere Mai let's get this show on the road 18:04:19 #info Ian Walls, ByWater Solutions, Koha 3.8 QAM 18:04:34 asus android epad touchscreen thingee 18:04:42 (fab tab) 18:04:47 #link http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/General_IRC_Meeting,_7_December_2011 18:04:59 #topic Announcements 18:05:03 jransom: nice. 18:05:08 * chris_n grumbles about FF crashing 18:05:11 #info Brendan Gallagher, ByWater Solutions 18:05:45 anyone have any earth shattering announcements? 18:06:08 3.4.7 is released 18:06:19 hooray 18:06:20 and in the wild 18:06:35 #topic Roadmap to 3.4 18:06:45 chris_n++ 18:06:50 chris_n++ indeed 18:07:18 #info 3.4.7 is released 18:07:45 the plan is to continue releases until applicable patches/commits slow to a trickle 18:07:50 anything else vaguely 3.4 related? 18:08:13 that's all from me 18:08:23 Project Koha_3.6.x build #16: STILL UNSTABLE in 1 h 26 mn: http://jenkins.koha-community.org/job/Koha_3.6.x/16/ 18:08:25 * ago: Bug 6971: XSLT Opac Detail displays 245 subfields out of order. 18:08:25 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6971 minor, PATCH-Sent, ---, ago, ASSIGNED , XSLT Opac Detail displays 245 subfields out of order 18:08:26 * jcamins: Bug 6971: XSLT Intranet Detail displays 245 subfields out of order 18:08:27 * oleonard: Bug 6291 - Cart printing truncated in Firefox 18:08:27 * paul.poulain: Test suite: ignoring backups from vi (files ending with a ~) 18:08:27 * maxime.pelletier: fix test xml records 18:08:27 #info D Ruth Bavousett, ByWater Solutions (sorry for the late hit) 18:08:27 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6291 normal, PATCH-Sent, ---, oleonard, ASSIGNED , Cart printing truncated in Firefox 18:08:28 * paul.poulain: history.txt, adding StÃ©phane Delaune, as 117, moving others and welcome Albert, you're 163th ! 18:08:29 * chrish: Bug 5327: Unit tests for C4/Exteral/BakerTaylor.pm 18:08:29 * Chris Cormack: Bug 5327 : Adding more unit tests 18:08:29 * Chris Cormack: Bug 5327 : Complete coverage for BackgroundJob.pm 18:08:29 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5327 enhancement, PATCH-Sent, ---, gmcharlt, ASSIGNED , Unit tests required for all C4 modules 18:08:30 awesome, if you do that for us, I don't think we'll complain. thanks a heap for the effort. :) 18:08:30 * Chris Cormack: Bug 5327 : Fixing unit test for SQLHelper.pm 18:08:30 * Chris Cormack: Bug 5327: Fixing the Members.t test 18:08:32 * paul.poulain: 160th developer + 2 events added (NZ tm and 3.6.1 released) 18:08:32 * paul.poulain: t/UploadedFile, updated comment 18:08:35 * chris.nighswonger: Release Notes for 3.06.02.000 07 Dec 2011 16:41:07 Z 18:08:35 Starting build 558 for job Koha_master (previous build: STILL UNSTABLE -- last SUCCESS #491 1 mo. 19 j ago) 18:08:44 thanks, jenkins_koha. quite timely 18:08:45 jenkins_koha: mute 18:08:45 slef did you mean me? Unknown command 'mute' 18:08:46 Use '!jenkins help' to get help! 18:08:55 heh 18:09:01 jenkins_koha: shut up 18:09:01 slef did you mean me? Unknown command 'shut' 18:09:01 #topic Roadmap to 3.6 18:09:01 Use '!jenkins help' to get help! 18:09:14 it appears jenkins wanted to say a few things 3.6 related :) 18:09:15 #info Paul Poulain, BibLibre, RM for 3.8 18:09:24 sorry to be a little bit late ! 18:09:31 no problem 18:09:36 3.6 is on target 18:09:41 * Brooke was deathly afraid of getting caught in a motorcade. 18:09:52 3.6.2 will release on 22 Dec 18:10:01 chris_n, pushed 1 hour ago 2 more patches that should please jenkins 18:10:16 build 558 should confirm that. 18:10:17 I have a script which is doing pretty much automated release notes each time I push to 3.6.x 18:10:26 ^^ awesome 18:10:35 he's cunning 18:10:36 so that should keep all of you folks in the know about what's to be in the next release 18:10:44 nice 18:10:48 chris_n++ 18:10:51 yep, chris' script is just awesome 18:10:52 chris_n++ 18:10:57 paul_p: looks like we're still unstable :( 18:11:01 chris_n++ 18:11:15 #info Owen Leonard, Athens County Public Libraries 18:11:50 chris_n, I know, but there should be only 4 problems now. And only 2 in fact, as that's problems declared twice 18:11:52 and that's it for 3.6 18:12:01 #topic Roadmap for 3.8 18:12:03 take it away Paul 18:12:16 chris_n, could you explain again your strategy to decide what should be in 3.6 and what will stay for 3.8 18:12:21 (before going to 3.8) 18:12:38 I think it's clear for me, but maybe not for everybody 18:13:01 new features go in 3.8 18:13:17 all else goes in 3.6 18:13:38 a feature is something currently non-existent in 3.6 18:14:01 chris_n: would it be fair to say that anything that changes a workflow would be a considered a feature? 18:14:07 the only real exception is things which are clearly too big to safely move back 18:14:22 for everybody = it means that an improvement to an existing feature, even if it's ENH, will be applied to 3.6 18:14:29 sekjal: I would define that more as "significantly" changes workflow 18:14:41 I think very minor changes are probably acceptable 18:14:54 and I agree with that 18:14:59 but some of this is open to discussion 18:15:09 but, say, the changes to handling Lost items as laid out in bug 5533 would NOT be backported 18:15:09 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5533 critical, PATCH-Sent, ---, srdjan, ASSIGNED , marking item lost diff in two places 18:15:12 I think fine-days is the issue here 18:15:32 its critical as marked 18:15:39 not enh 18:15:42 chris_n, (one of ) the issue is that it's a bug, not an ENH 18:15:58 chris_n: Does that mean that complete code rewrites which do not introduce new features will be allowed in 3.6? 18:15:59 even if fixing the problem means changing (a little bit) the workflow 18:16:29 thd: for example? 18:16:46 paul_p: the problem I see is the change for the debar handling 18:16:49 with dates and notes 18:17:06 thd: in reality they would not 18:17:07 a short warning to libraries updating might be good at least 18:17:10 in the release notes 18:17:19 chris_n: sorry, my question was meant with more humour than seriousness :) 18:17:26 cait, right. and that's what we were/are supposed to do. 18:17:26 :) 18:17:36 chris_n, was it in 3.6.1 ? (I think no) 18:17:41 thd Koha is srs buisnass ;) 18:17:56 paul_p: it? 18:18:05 #info Magnus Enger, Libriotech, Norway 18:18:06 chris_n, finedays 18:18:18 it does not apply cleanly atm 18:18:32 Question - I have the system set up to send emails to patrons about everything, yet it never sends emails, the status is always "pending". Could there possibly be something I haven't clicked? I feel like I've checked every box known to man. 18:18:40 a good plumbing-level-only change could be done without changing any outward appearance 18:18:50 chris_n, on 3.6 ? really ? 18:18:54 the followup for bug 5211 is a small example thereof 18:18:54 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5211 major, PATCH-Sent, ---, srdjan, ASSIGNED , marking lost (long overdue) not charging fines 18:18:59 paul_p: I'll look 18:19:01 Sorry mib_9y99lh, we are having a meeting at the moment 18:19:06 mib_9y99lh: there is a meeting going on right now, so you may have more luck in an hour. 18:19:13 mib_9y99lh, there is a meeting going on -- check to make sure the process_message_queue.pl cron job is running 18:19:37 paul_p: whats the bug number? 18:19:41 I didn't realize this was not the place to ask questions. My bad. 18:19:50 it is just not right now ;) 18:19:50 chris_n, 632_ 18:19:51 mib_9y99lh: no, it is. You just came at a bad time. 18:19:52 It's the place, just not the time 18:19:53 chris_n, 6328 18:19:59 it is the place, but once a month there is a meeting 18:20:23 if ye send it to the listserv, someone will pick it up most likely 18:20:43 ok 18:20:44 paul_p: its not in 3.6.x atm, and would not apply cleanly 18:20:45 fines in days? 18:20:46 i guess fines in days is debatable imho 18:20:59 seems so wahanui 18:21:02 rather than discuss every little bug 18:21:16 how bout we say that if there's a question, Paul and Chris will have a cage match 18:21:36 Brooke, you're right. but chris_n, please let me know if 6328 does not apply, because it's a BLO for us ! 18:21:44 is there a large amount of concern about introducing fine-days fixes into 3.6? 18:21:56 paul_p: it does not 18:22:07 or would not for me this morning 18:22:18 I have to had time to update the bug 18:22:21 chris_n, for all french libraries, and most Spanish / italian libraries it is ! 18:22:55 as, 99% of french libraries use fines in days 18:23:14 well... 60%. 39% doing no fines at all, and 1% fines in € 18:23:17 perhaps we could get a second sign-off? for 3.6 and a documentation? 18:23:23 if there is a fair amount of concern about introducing fine-days fixes into 3.6.x, please let me know 18:23:40 tajoli, hello ! could you confirm to chris_n that fines in days is something important for you too ! 18:23:49 (we're just discussing of this) 18:23:53 yes, I confirm 18:24:08 I think it probably should be fixed in 3.6.x if not too disruptive 18:24:11 in Italy ALL library in practies use fine in days 18:24:21 sekjal: is this related to your earlier question of workflow? 18:24:28 tajoli: don't forget to introduce yourself with #info 18:24:33 No one use money 18:24:42 chris_n: yes. this doesn't just change how fine in days works 18:24:47 it changes how debarred works in general 18:25:00 #info Zeno Tajoli, CILEA (Italy) 18:25:21 we use finesin nz 18:25:30 I think it's a great improvement, but I can see a library getting upset because something like this changes on them in the middle of a stable release 18:25:55 sekjal, if it's clearly announced in the release notes, I think it's not a so big change. 18:26:08 jransom: by charging them money or by banning a borrower for N days? 18:26:13 I'd like to hear from others on this 18:26:22 charging money 18:26:29 before making a decision 18:26:30 fair. Do we drop a mail on koha ML ? 18:26:42 yes 18:26:48 Fixing a bug in a completely broken feature which is a use blocker might need some way of getting into stable. 18:26:48 this is way too granular for the meeting 18:26:56 so 18:27:02 chris_n, you do, or I do ? (the mail) 18:27:02 thd: the problem is, it never worked since 3.2 18:27:03 paul roadmap to 3.8 svp 18:27:06 moving_on++ 18:27:13 and it changes the API and the interface 18:27:13 paul_p: go ahead 18:27:18 OK, will do. 18:27:19 that's why there is some concern 18:27:36 OK, 3.8 now 18:28:03 #info bug 6328 is on hold for 3.6.x pending list responses 18:28:03 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6328 major, PATCH-Sent, ---, paul.poulain, ASSIGNED , Fine in days does not work 18:28:10 paul_p: can you include an outline of the API change in the mail please? 18:28:11 The feature even if long broken is not new and is certainly necessary. 18:28:24 1st a question: do ppl think a monthly mail from me is a good thing ? 18:28:33 yes 18:28:34 yep : 18:28:35 yes 18:28:35 For me yes 18:28:35 :) 18:28:38 How do libraries cope without the feature? 18:28:42 me too yes 18:28:43 yes 18:28:46 thd: take it to the list 18:28:47 +1 18:28:51 +1 for monthly mails 18:28:52 0 18:28:53 OK, so I'll continue this way. 18:28:54 please 18:28:57 paul_p: yes 18:28:58 +1 18:29:01 yes 18:29:08 yes 18:29:17 +1 for more mail 18:29:21 if you think there's something I should speak of in everymail, don't hesitate to tell me 18:29:38 Project Koha_3.4.x build #65: STILL UNSTABLE in 1 h 27 mn: http://jenkins.koha-community.org/job/Koha_3.4.x/65/ 18:29:38 chris.nighswonger: Release Notes for 3.04.07.000 07 Dec 2011 16:48:02 Z 18:29:39 very fresh news: there are a lot of things made on the performance side. 18:29:49 * i've pushed some patches 18:29:56 argle. 18:29:57 Starting build 66 for job Koha_3.4.x (previous build: STILL UNSTABLE -- last SUCCESS #50 2 mo. 0 j ago) 18:30:08 * the "de-nesting C4 package" should also be tested 18:30:24 * BibLibre has a patch that should hit bugzilla soon that improve by 1 second every search ! 18:30:27 improving_performance++ 18:30:38 improving_performance++ 18:30:44 * Ian submitted a patch to play with yaml file for config. I'll test it tomorrow I think 18:30:58 * i've started a page with benchmarking on the wiki 18:31:16 that's probably the main thing i'll focus on in december ! 18:31:24 #info paul's pushed a bunch of patches 18:31:25 I plan to focus on one thing each month. 18:31:33 is anyone working on Bug 6802 18:31:33 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6802 critical, P5 - low, ---, gmcharlt, NEW , with IndependantBranches on can still edit items 18:31:34 ¡ 18:31:36 ? 18:31:36 this month, speed 18:32:05 tcohen: several ByWater partners have expressed concern over it, but we don't have a finalized plan of attack het 18:32:11 s/het/yet/ 18:32:32 I almost forget: bywater & catalyst are working on Plack/mod_perl 18:32:45 yes 18:32:47 sekjal, i'll drop you a mail tomorrow about that, I want to participate ;-) 18:32:57 paul_p: most excellent 18:33:01 hey paul_p please cc me 18:33:18 bag ? (who are you ?) -sorry, I missed the beginning) 18:33:19 let us know, we're concerned about that as it is holding a university fromr migrating 18:33:27 bag = brendan :) 18:33:37 bag = brendan arthur gallagher 18:33:48 bg? 18:33:49 I LOVE BASEBALL AND BREAKFAST BURRITOS 18:33:57 yup that bg :) 18:34:04 multiple_nicks-- ;-) 18:34:07 paul_p: do you mean to #info not *? 18:34:08 what bug is yaml-for-config? 18:34:08 @query yaml config 18:34:08 huginn`: hello? 18:34:09 zAngG! 18:34:12 slef: 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7170 normal, P3, ---, paul.poulain, NEW , Remove use of XML::Simple 18:34:13 slef: 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6915 minor, PATCH-Sent, ---, gbarniskis, ASSIGNED , koha_perl_deps.pl truncates long module names at 26 chars 18:34:14 slef: 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=7167 enhancement, PATCH-Sent, ---, paul.poulain, ASSIGNED , updatedatabase improvements 18:34:14 (ok, will cc you, of course) 18:34:15 slef: 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6488 normal, PATCH-Sent, ---, srdjan, ASSIGNED , opachiddenitems not working in master 18:34:16 slef: 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=6193 enhancement, PATCH-Sent, ---, tomascohen, ASSIGNED , Use memcached cache koha-conf.xml configuration variables 18:34:17 slef: I've exhausted my database of quotes 18:34:22 I have a concern about patches that are skipping the QA step - I've seen a couple now, bug 4051, for example doesn't seem to have had a going over by one of the designated qa folks. 18:34:22 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=4051 enhancement, PATCH-Sent, ---, adrien.saurat, ASSIGNED , add columns to overdues export 18:34:53 wizzyrea, they haven't skipped the QA test, it's just that I made the QA. 18:34:54 oof sorry folks I just fell offline 18:34:57 (and pushed) 18:35:10 but, that's not the agreed situation? 18:35:27 wizzyrea, yes, that is. 18:35:29 wizzyrea: the current set of QA rules we're operating under allow the RM to jump straight from a "Signed Off" to a "Pushed" 18:35:46 I see. 18:35:47 provided that the author/signer are not from the same company 18:35:50 as the RM 18:35:50 I just don't do that for a patch made by BibLibre and signed-off by BibLibre too 18:36:01 and I try to do that on small patches. 18:36:06 if that's the agreed set of rules 18:36:09 should go on the wiki 18:36:15 hmm, 4051 doesn't follow that paradigm. 18:36:20 I am a bit more worried about untested follow ups 18:37:02 wizzyrea, I promize chris_c has not been hired by BibLibre yet ;-) 18:37:07 wizzyrea: signoff is by rangi 18:37:08 wizzyrea: I tend to belive RM with final decisions... What is your concern? 18:37:26 cait, do you have an example ? 18:37:45 the updatedatebase to the 'unknown' problem for item_DUE 18:37:56 sorry, I have a problem with numbers 18:37:58 but can find it 18:38:01 I have added a few follow-ups, but that was only comments or very minor things like that. Except for the item_DUE, that I tested before pushing. 18:38:32 ok, I concede that you got a signoff external to biblibre, but the patch was originally biblibre, and didn't go through a non biblibre QA. I'm not trying to generate work, I'm just trying to understand the rules. 18:38:33 cait, would you have prefered a failed QA because the updatedatabase is missing ? 18:38:42 yes 18:38:47 let me explain 18:39:11 wizzyrea, 4 steps (provide patch / sign-off patch / QA / push), there must be at least 2 companies involved. 18:39:12 and sorry for picking that - it was the fist I was thinking of 18:39:44 and, for "large" patch, I won't QA myself, even if I could with our rules 18:39:51 I was very surprised about the version numbering for this, so it's a good example perhaps anyway 18:40:07 and it would not have hurt to push the first patch - and the updatedatabase later on 18:40:09 I feel that RM should be reluctant to QA. If RM=QA then we've one less set of eyeballs. But sometimes it's necessary. 18:40:29 sorry, not trying to be annoying 18:40:30 I agree with slef. 18:40:33 cait, that's a topic i've added (database version) 18:40:46 maybe I changed something, without knowing... 18:41:01 #link http://www.mail-archive.com/koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org/msg02253.html 18:41:20 Personaly I think that same time RM=QA is OK. Fore example SQL file of no-english languages 18:41:41 in the last days, I made some QA, but it was only for small/obvious patches, except the item_DUE one. 18:42:36 * slef notes his internet connection quality has gone through the floor :( 18:43:06 well I guess I'll be happy with it if it's the approved process. 18:43:06 in the link I just posted, I laid out 6 rules for QA 18:43:15 like wizzyrea said 18:43:21 or what she said 18:43:22 the only response on that thread was from paul_p 18:44:09 sekjal: your rules are sane. 18:44:20 * magnuse gotta catch a plane 18:44:46 thanks, wizzyrea. I'd hoped so. I think what remains is for the community as a whole to ratify or reject them 18:44:47 sekjal: I remember replying to the signed-off patches point. :-/ 18:45:01 put it on the agenda 18:45:05 aha 18:45:10 that's how things get ratified or rejected :P 18:45:24 slef: there were several concurrent threads on similar subjects; I may have misplaced your response. looking... 18:46:11 sekjal: I may have mistakenly discarded the thread you linked as a duplicate. Too many people still cross-post to koha and koha-devel and sometimes it confuses me. 18:46:28 morning 18:46:32 morena 18:46:37 'morning rangi 18:46:48 we're getting really granular again 18:46:49 so 18:46:55 Brooke++ 18:46:56 what do we want to do about qa? 18:47:11 Chiris, on your mail about 3.4.7 you insert the line RELEASE NOTES FOR KOHA 3.6.2 18:47:11 or were we just seeking a clarification? 18:47:27 i've another concern about QA/jenkins 18:47:43 i've added it on the agenda: when jenkins complains, what should be do ? 18:47:55 I think what he's doing now is just peachy 18:48:08 (good) 18:48:09 ppl should fix the stuff they broke 18:48:09 (a slightly more general aside: can any msg me how to get a complete mbox-like copy of sekjal's email so I can reply to it?) 18:48:12 k moving on to what paul just mentioned 18:48:21 #topic Pushing a Patch with a Jenkins complain 18:48:22 brooke: what will do with these parked 'granular' issues that do need addressing 18:48:31 * rangi spent a few hours yesterday doing that for others 18:48:39 hopefully they'll go out to the list 18:48:46 get some sort of resolution 18:48:51 bug 5327 18:48:51 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5327 enhancement, PATCH-Sent, ---, gmcharlt, ASSIGNED , Unit tests required for all C4 modules 18:48:54 and come up again in a more condensed version 18:49:02 and bug 5604 18:49:02 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=5604 normal, PATCH-Sent, ---, nengard, ASSIGNED , additional icons for the Seshat set 18:49:07 or be ironed out on IRC while it's not the meeting 18:49:08 rangi++ 18:49:11 patches on those 18:49:23 we could address them here every month, but that is how you get 8 hour meetings. 18:49:25 paul_p: I'd pick option 1.5 ;-) maybe slower than immediate revert if a fix is promised, but revert breakages faster than a week if possible, else it may block some testers 18:49:27 will stop jenkins complaining 18:49:28 i've pushed another fix to tests (boolean.t was wrong) 18:49:47 Brooke: I think we should talk about that here 18:49:50 really 18:50:25 QA practice is a critical issue 18:50:34 are we using any mock libs for unit tests? 18:50:37 I agree that we can't have unit tests and keep breaking them for weeks 18:50:44 (but dont want an 8 hour meeting either :) 18:50:45 things that break unit tests should not go in 18:50:46 fail qa 18:50:47 cait++ 18:51:22 right so that means that as developers we probably need to be more fastidious about running the unit tests on our work 18:51:23 it's easy to run the tests - we should add it to the development and qa workflows 18:51:24 well, yes, that's another aspect: why would such a thing be pushed? 18:51:31 cait++ 18:51:56 and if it breaks - either the tests are wrong or the feature - but both should be fixed. 18:51:57 cait++ 18:52:04 cait, it's easy to run the tests, but there are so many, you don't always know which one to run 18:52:06 the developer failed to test, the signed-offer failed, QAM didn't flag it and RM didn't notice? 18:52:13 you can run them all 18:52:14 it's not that long 18:52:17 prove 18:52:27 one line in a window, do something else in another ;) 18:52:30 cait, jenkins need more than 1 hours to run all the tests ! 18:52:50 rangi told me he ran 00.* before pushing anything. 18:52:58 #action someone please add documentation to the developer/git pages on the wiki on "how to run tests" 18:53:17 #help Add Documentation about Testing to the wiki 18:53:35 is there a guidelines section for writing testsunit ? 18:53:35 not usre, I thought they were running faster last time I did 18:53:38 if you change a module, u should at least run its test 18:53:40 I think it's OK to have jenkins complaining, if we have a clear workflow like "if jenkins complains, if a patch is not provided in the next 7days, it will be reverted" 18:53:53 so perhaps it's a bit harder, but still not too hard 18:54:04 well I think we should head those off 18:54:09 or change a template, run those tests 18:54:10 rangi: that doesn't look right 18:54:12 developer should run the test on their own work 18:54:22 forget that 18:54:23 cait: I forgot that 18:54:24 signoff should run the tests 18:54:27 that is 18:54:40 u dont have to run all, but at least the relevant ones 18:54:40 * jcamins didn't find the tests took that long when he tried running them. I think Jenkins is on a VPS that doesn't have a lot of power because rangi donated it. 18:54:51 (and say they did, if they did, then qa may not need to!) 18:54:53 rangi++ 18:54:56